Member Info for LayLadyLay

Nobody want to make any comment?

'what i like the most and i don't think the market has quite got is that most of the team take shares as part of there wages.'

alto1 - the company is in cash conseravation mode and the arrangement whereby BoD salaries are paid 50% in cash and 50% by shareholders is a matter of necessity rather than a vote of confidence by the BoD.

Same old, same old! NR used to say that the company was fully funded. It's like when you all repeat the mantra that the company is CF+. The reality is that the company has a relatively small cash pot that is diminishing. Deals are being done at shareholders expense by issuing stock because the company can't afford any cash deals.

And while we are on the subject of M&A deals we should remind ourselves that NR never completed the BOLT deal despite raising funds several times and the same goes for Trinity-Innis which was a debacle that cost LGO. So here we are again seeing the same deals being resurrected and yet to complete. Why should anyone trust that these deals, and the new Steeldrum deal, will ever complete and make a difference to where the company is headed? Don't count your chickens until they have hatched. Some of you are way ahead of reality.

Remember that the company lost over £5m in 2017. CF+ is not the same as profitability. I am fully expecting CERP to have to draw down from Lind or else raise funds by way of placing. Maybe another 'you don't say no to Schroders' type of investment from somewhere or other? All dilutive but if you believe its accretive then place your bets on the future of the sp. Let's hope that Schroders, or any other significant holder, doesn't decide to cut and run if milestones on the roadmap are missed.

We need to see results not rhetoric. CERP can only last so long on the strength of media presentations. Good luck with your investment.

Don't let a few rampers put you off from posting Irene. They all suffer from analysis paralysis and it would suit them to have the board sanitized so that only posts that are aligned with their agenda to dupe newbys with false hope are in evidence. A typical tactic they use is to swamp the board with drivel in an attempt to hide any genuine concerns. As you have seen, they are quick to make wild statements based on media interviews but when asked to justify their comments they are only able to resort to abuse. For some reason they believe that only positive views are relevant in a discussion.

I notice recently that these same people talk as if prospective deals have already been completed. They are way ahead of reality. They will learn the hard way. In my opinion CERP is simply LGO in disguise. The company may have changed it's name but the same problems are in evidence and I don't believe there is a magic formula that will transform the company into a profitable business. Long term I question it's viability as a going concern without resorting to the dilutive fund raining exercises that were the downfall of the previous management. Labelling every placing and/or acquisition as 'accretive' does not hide the fact that as more shares are issued so it falls on individual investors to purchase more and more shares in order to maintain their parcentage holding in the company. Will the sp rise accordingly or languish in the typical aim spike and retreat as the herd comes and goes to feast at the expense of those who sit on their hands; so called long term holders.

Whatever the future holds, this is an interesting story to watch unfold.

'Accelerating a C02 EOR Pilot was always the primary objective of the Company as a means of uplifting production rates compared to the expensive deployment of capital for limited production potential from low pressure, "exhausted", reservoirs in the mature Inniss-Trinity oil field.'

findahappyplace - VSA Capital acts as Joint Broker to Columbus Energy Resources, and is therefore classed as a connected company. No other broker is covering Columbus.

It's important to remember this when you are quoting extracts from their research report.

Personally I am firmly in the RNS camp and view the media presentations as something of a sideshow. There's nothing wrong with having an occasional presentation but I feel that media is taking centre stage to the extent that I wonder if some posters don't even bother to read the RNS. There's no doubt in my mind that LK uses the media presentations to sell his vision by use of suggestions, subliminal or otherwise, that are readily taken up and repeated ad nauseum by his followers.

Enjoy the presentations if they float your boat but beware of assuming they are equivalent to regulatory news.

I think it's almost certain that there will be a drawdown from the new Lind facility. There has been significant cash burn with cash in hand down from US$4.1m at the end of Q1 to US$2.4m at the end of Q2. If cash burn continues at the same rate in Q3 there will be only US$700k at the end of Q3 unless there is some increase in revenue to compensate. Integrating Steeldrum with the existing business could well be a costly exercise in the short term with little immediate benefit in terms of increased output and revenue.

It's a misconception that the new Lind facility is at 8.1p. This only applies if Lind chooses to convert any of the loan to equity, which they are unlikely to do if the current sp is lower than 8.1p. More than likely Lind will simply take cash repayments each month and if CERP decides to make any repayments in shares instead of cash then this would be at the prevailing sp.

Vmax - I preempted that someone would say 'we are not an Asian company', which is why I pointed out that it doesn't detract from the relevance.

CERP didn't say that they agree with shareholder decision on this matter. Leo's actual words were, "it's no skin off our nose" and he said that they would probably do what they did last time anyway and give shareholders a chance to take part in any new share issue. I thought that Leo looked disappointed that the resolution was rejected despite putting on a brave face.

CERP directors wanted the power to be able to make non-preemptive allotment of shares. It is no surprise that this resolution was defeated. I imagine that certain major shareholders voted against adoption of this resolution.

But how many of you understand the implications of this resolution and the power it would have conferred?

This article will hopefully give you some insight. It primarily references Asian companies but that does not dtract from its relevance.

'If you own stock in a listed company, the value of your investment is not only the monetary value of these shares but also your share of control in the company. This technically gives you the right to either approve or oppose certain management actions. And as a shareowner, you typically have the right to buy any new shares that the company may issue — referred to as "preemptive rights." But many Asian companies seek approval for a shareowners’ mandate at annual general meetings (AGMs) to issue shares without these preemptive rights. Such mandates give management the right to issue shares to hand-picked investors, and usually at a discount to market price.'

https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/marketintegrity/2014/03/02/non-preemptive-share-issues-in-asia-reforming-rules-to-protect-investors/

Watch out for a short term gain followed by long term pain once dilution starts to hit and costs start to escalate.

Koot's expansion plans obfuscate the failure to resolve Goudron decline problems.

Has he bitten off more than he can chew with his latest expansionist plan? Never mind the quality, feel the width!

Is the delay in publishing Q2 production figures a portent of some kind of major setback? Is the upcoming Malcy interview a damage limitation exercise intended to calm investor nerves? Will tomorrow's agm and an early morning RNS reveal some genuine progress or will Leo have to put on his biggest smile and try to convince his ardent followers that all is well? Is there going to be an unexpected fund raiseto keep the ship afloat?

I sense that the honeymoon, and the new management bounce, may be coming to an abrupt end.

The classic poem by Mary Howitt is one that regularly comes to mind when I read the usual suspects weaving their web on a daily basis. With an RNS expected at any moment, I shall be looking for which one of you can declare. 'Great RNS!' the quickest. I must advise contestants that you are likely to have to beat 5 nanoseconds after publication to have any chance of being the first. I imagine that some of you have been on a speed reading course to enable yourself to absorb several pages of text and numbers in such quick fashion. Or is the alternative explanation more likely, that some of you don't bother to read anything but simply declare each and every RNS to be proof positive that the sp is about to explode in a never ending upwards trajectory in the hope of encouraging unresearched newbies to plunge headlong into buying your shares at a price higher than you paid? Who says ramping doesn't pay?

CF+ is only at the operational level. It means that revenue exceeds the cost of production. It doesn't mean CERP is making a profit. Capex in Q1 exceeded the cash generated from operations. Capex is not included in the calculation of 'operational' cash flow.

Perhaps the BoD has mentioned it's attempt to minimise cash burn as a way of preparing investors for whatever will be revealed in the Q2 update, due imminently.

'In taking this action, the Executive Directors and Executive Management members wish to continue to align themselves with the Company's shareholders and also reduce the Company's cash burn, thereby enabling these funds to be invested in other value-adding business opportunities.'

Investors are being spun a line IMHO. The BoD are all guaranteed to earn vast amounts irrespective of the share price. How does that align with shareholders who are paying them their salaries and share options? They can't lose, whatever happens to the company. Can you say that? What alignment?

The sp is currently down 6%. That tells us what the market thinks of this announcement. Perhaps they should have sweetened this with some good news ... if there is any!

It's a deal that makes a lot of sense for Touchstone, more than for CERP I suspect. CERP takes on the liability for operating the field. Is there any real benefit in acquiring 100% ownership of such a low producing field? Only time will tell if this is a smart move or a dumb one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2bCU2qaOZU

Positive cash flow was only from operations in Q1. Capex exceeded the cash generated. Then we have corporate costs to consider. I suspect that corporate profitability is some way off.

Some of you want to rejuvinate more wells but that may not be cost effective.

On paper CERP has multiple opportunities due to it's acquisition of acreage in the SWP. However, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating and investors would be wise not to assume that the SWP will yield vast resources of the amber nectar. Oil exploration is always a gamble. It could pay off big time or be a damp squib. There are no guarantees so tread carefully and don't let rampy posts on a bulletin board lure you into taking undue risk.

" Not sure why this (relatively) small M&A-deal would have to trigger a new review?"

It's just PR spin by the in-house broker IMHO. It subtly suggests that the announcement is significant. It's akin to a fisherman throwing some ground bait into the water to attract fish. VSA just doing the job CERP pays them to do.

As permitted by section 408 of the Companies Act 2006, the profit and loss account of the parent company has not been separately presented in these accounts. The parent company loss for the year was £2,163,000 (2016: £1,573,000).